UNCLASSIFIED
Independent Review of Partnership for Knowledge-based Poverty Reduction (PKPR)
MANAGEMENT RESPONSE AND LEARNING AND DISSEMINATION
Prepared by:
Patricia Bachtiar, Social Protection Unit, AusAID Jakarta
Approved by:
Rachael Moore, Counsellor, Governance & Social Development, AusAID Jakarta
Through:
Fiona MacIver, First Secretary, Social Protection Unit, AusAID Jakarta
Date Approved:
Activity Objective/s
The Partnership for Knowledge-based Poverty Reduction (PKPR) is a $7.5 million program which
commenced in April 2010. It was due to be completed in December 2014, but has been extended until June
2015. It aims to strengthen national efforts to reduce poverty and vulnerability by supporting the
Government of Indonesia (GoI) to make informed and evidence-based policy and program decisions. It has
three pillars: i) the provision of analytics and strengthening the analytical capacity of GoI and local institutes;
ii) supporting GoI in the design, implementation and evaluation of key poverty and social protection
programs; and iii) helping GoI to improve the quality and accessibility of data required for poverty analysis
and policy making.
Activity Summary
AidWorks initiative/
Activity number
INJ244/10A664
Commencement date
6 April 2010
Total Australian $
7.5 million
Total other $
0
Delivery
organisation(s)
Poverty Reduction Team, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management
(PREM) Unit, The World Bank
Implementing
partner(s)

The World Bank

Local Think-tanks/Universities
Completion date
Country/Region
Indonesia
Primary sector
Economic Growth/MDG 1 – End Poverty and Hunger
Tool: Management Response Template (registered # 158)
Effective from December 2012 to December 2013
30 June 2015
page 1 of 6
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Independent Review Summary
Review
Objective/s
The Independent Progress Review (IPR) was undertaken approximately 28 months
after the commencement of PKPR and was part of AusAID’s standard quality
performance program. The review had a three-fold purpose:
i)
ii)
iii)
Assess the progress of the program against its objectives with particular
emphasis on its effectiveness in strengthening capacity in the GoI;
Assess the relevance of the program and identify how the program might be
improved; and
Identify the lessons and compare these with lessons from similar programs.
Review
Completion Date
3 December 2012
Review Team



Ms. Julie Hind, Team Leader and Evaluation Specialist
Mr. Gatot Widayanto, Team Member and Organisational Development Specialist
Mr. Euan Hind, Researcher supporting the Team Leader
Key Messages

PKPR is providing GoI with a level of poverty analytics and advice not readily
available by other means. It is filling a much needed gap in terms of rapid response
studies. Its access to a global bank of knowledge and resources and the capacity
to meet ad hoc analytical requests is a comparative advantage. The downside is
that it may result in fewer requests by GoI to local institutes for such studies. This
has negative impacts on the capacity of institutes, compounding the already serious
shortage of capacity of local institutes.
PKPR is targeting capacity development at different levels – individuals,
organisations and their systems, and the enabling environment, which aligns with
contemporary good practice. PKPR has seen positive results where a
collaborative, team approach has been taken, but there were calls for more
planned, intentional capacity development strategies that were directed by
counterpart agencies.
PKPR is making an important contribution to the uptake of evidence for decisionmaking. The program demonstrates a number of practices that will make research
links with policy successful: focus on policy problems; closely engaging with
policymakers; a good understanding of the political environment; and investing in
communication and engagement. PKPR, unfortunately, has not yet included local
institutes in knowledge sharing activities because PKPR does not have well
established links or relationships with them.
PKPR’s current monitoring and evaluation framework lacks a program theory, and
so it is difficult to assess whether the interventions will plausibly result in the desired
outcomes. The framework provides little attention to measuring capacity
development
PKPR is highly relevant on two review criteria: alignment with GoI and AusAID
policies and priorities; and based on good contextual analysis. Greater diligence is
needed on other review criteria: the appropriateness of the mix of interventions;
appropriate budget allocation to the various pillars commensurate with the level of
priority and the difficulty of the task; effective program governance and oversight;
implementation methods to suit the context and expected to result in sustainable
change; and the program working with the right counterparts.




Tool: Management Response Template (registered # 158)
Effective from December 2012 to December 2013
page 2 of 6
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Management Response
The review team provided eight (8) recommendations. AusAID agrees to seven of them and partially agrees
to one recommendation. AusAID is working with the World Bank to implement the recommendations.
Recommendation One
PKPR, along with key stakeholders, should develop a new results framework using a program theory
approach, that is, the explicit theory or model of how the program causes the intended outcomes. The
framework should incorporate attention to the basic elements for monitoring and evaluating capacity
development and measuring analytics. PKPR should engage a monitoring and evaluation specialist with
expertise in facilitating frameworks using program theory and who is able to provide on-going advice and
support.
Response: AusAID agrees with the recommendation.
Actions: PKPR will mobilise a theory of change specialist in the first half of 2013 to facilitate the new results
framework development that includes a long term focus on capacity building. PKPR will ensure on-going
monitoring and evaluation advice and support is available throughout the PKPR implementation. Current
program plans will be adjusted to reflect changes in the framework.
Recommendation Two
PKPR and AusAID should jointly facilitate a planning process with key stakeholders, to redesign the local
research institute capacity building program so it is more inclusive in nature and programmatically integrated
with the Knowledge Sector program. PKPR should provide a pool of technical experts that the institutes can
access for a range of analytical capacity development. A pool of funds for research grants should remain as
part of the program and be administered by the PKPR.
Response: AusAID partially agrees with the recommendation. A joint planning process is required to
discuss the strategy to strengthen analytical capacities of local research institutes. A full redesign of the
local research institute capacity building program is not required.
Actions: A joint planning process will be conducted in line with the new results framework (see actions
under Recommendation One). The strategy will consider the distribution of roles between PKPR and the
AusAID Knowledge Sector. For example: Knowledge Sector provides organisational support and core
funding for the local research institutes. PKPR supports a local research institute only when it requires
analytical capacity building.
Recommendation Three
PKPR is to shift its approach to the development and delivery of a poverty-related curriculum for a future
generation of analysts and policymakers to one that is focused on supporting the universities to undertake
this work. PKPR should either fund the universities or embed relevant PKPR staff in the universities.
Include attention to organisational development.
Response: AusAID agrees in principle with the recommendation.
Actions: The recommendation will be further considered in the joint planning process, described under
actions for Recommendation Two. Implementation may depend on whether university/ies are able to take
up the curriculum or whether this is a longer term objective.
Recommendation Four
A more regular and planned approach is to be taken to the PKPR Joint Management Committee (JMC) in
order to strengthen program governance and oversight.
Response: AusAID agrees with the recommendation.
Tool: Management Response Template (registered # 158)
Effective from December 2012 to December 2013
page 3 of 6
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Actions: PKPR will improve governance oversight which ensures partners and donors take a more active
part in determining the program priorities. The World Bank and AusAID will now co-chair the JMC together
with the National Team for Accelerating Poverty Reduction (TNP2K) and Bappenas. The JMC meetings will
be supplemented by more regular operational meetings in which priority areas of support will be identified.
The operational meetings will be attended by more operational-level staff of the JMC co-chairing institutions,
and representatives from other ministries/agencies benefitting program activities. PKPR will ensure that
workplans submitted for the JMC endorsement are developed based on the priorities nominated by the
program stakeholders.
Recommendation Five
PKPR is to implement a planned and staged strategy to ensure that, over time, all studies and rapid
responses analytics are either conducted jointly between PKPR and local institutes or independently by
capable local institutes. The strategy should incorporate technical assistance and mentoring of the partners
where joint studies are undertaken. The focus should be on partnering with institutes not individual
researchers.
Response: AusAID agrees with the recommendation.
Actions: PKPR needs to undertake the recommended strategy as a standard operation. However, AusAID
acknowledges that this strategy cannot be implemented in the case of requests for rapid assistance which
sometimes demand a turn-around time as short as 24-48 hours. In such situations, PKPR will report
regularly (through semi-annual progress reporting) to AusAID, and explain the nature of the request and why
the work could not be conducted jointly with a local institute. PKPR needs also to inform AusAID on the kind
of rapid responses that may be required by the partner government agencies.
Recommendation Six
The Unit Manager Social Protection Programs, AusAID establish more formal and regular internal processes
to ensure improved interface of the knowledge sector components of PKPR with the larger AusAID
Knowledge Sector program.
Response: AusAID agrees with the recommendation.
Actions: AusAID will ensure that the Knowledge Sector team be invited to the PKPR JMC meetings, as well
as to the program stakeholder meetings. The Social Protection and Knowledge Sector teams will work
closely in oversight of the program, and AusAID’s approach will be better coordinated to ensure strategic
oversight is maintained across all relevant sector teams.
Recommendation Seven
PKPR should introduce an approach in which it negotiates agreements with counterpart agencies about how
PKPR will support the priorities identified by each agency. These agreements should identify outputs,
outcomes, incremental steps and successes, and how PKPR and the agency will jointly monitor
interventions.
Response: AusAID agrees with the recommendation.
Actions: AusAID notes that the ‘agreements’ referred to in the recommendation do not mean PKPR has to
set up a separate agreement negotiation with each partner government agency. It will be a standard
practice of PKPR to have a more open and rigorous processes in developing workplans that are based on
the respective partner government agency’s own priorities and agenda in relation to a specific program. For
example: PKPR will work in synergy with other donors to support the Ministry of Social Affairs in the
implementation of PKH program. PKPR will be accountable to the relevant partner government agency for
the implementation of the workplans, as well as to AusAID.
Tool: Management Response Template (registered # 158)
Effective from December 2012 to December 2013
page 4 of 6
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Recommendation Eight
PKPR develops and establishes a knowledge broker program, taking the lead in facilitating a range of
knowledge sharing activities for a wide range of stakeholders including GoI, parliamentarians, local
universities and institutes. The program should be developed jointly with a working group of key
stakeholders.
Response: AusAID agrees with the recommendation.
Actions: PKPR can immediately develop and establish the recommended knowledge broker activities. The
program can be further adjusted once the new results framework is available.
Learning and Dissemination Approach
Target Audiences



Internal AusAID:
o Indonesia program Jakarta Post, including the Knowledge Sector and the PNPM teams
o Indonesia desk in Canberra
o AusAID Canberra Social Protection Policy
Relevant Indonesian Government Agencies:
o National Team for Accelerating Poverty Reduction (TNP2K)
o National Agency for Development Planning (BAPPENAS)
o National Statistics Agency (BPS)
o Ministry of Finance (MOF)
Implementing partner:
o the Poverty Reduction Team, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Unit, World
Bank Jakarta
Dissemination Approach
The IPR and Management Response will be publicly accessible through the AusAID website.
The draft report was distributed to AusAID social protection and knowledge sector teams, and also to the
World Bank as the program implementing partner for comments.
The final IPR report will be shared with relevant Indonesian government agencies as identified in the
distribution list.
Learning and Dissemination Actions

Public release:
o The PKPR IPR will be available and ready for public release via AusAID internet in April
2013. This will be shared with key Indonesian Government partners.
Distribution List
Stakeholders
Management Response Included
Distribution Method
Internal AusAID
Yes
Soft copy
Indonesian Government Partners
Yes
Hard and soft copies
Tool: Management Response Template (registered # 158)
Effective from December 2012 to December 2013
page 5 of 6
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Stakeholders
Management Response Included
Distribution Method
The World Bank
Yes
Soft copy
Australian Public
Yes
Uploaded onto AusAID website
Distribution List
Activity
Target Audience
By When?
Who
Presentation of Aide
Memoire
AusAID Jakarta Post &
World Bank
13 September 2012
Evaluation manager
Circulation of draft IPR to
AusAID Jakarta Post &
the World Bank
AusAID/Social Protection
team and Knowledge
Sector team, World Bank
18 October 2012
Evaluation manager
Circulation of final IPR
and management
response to the JMC and
stakeholders
World Bank, TNP2K,
June 2013
Bappenas, BPS and MoF
Release of final IPR and General Australian public
management response to
the public via AusAID
website
Tool: Management Response Template (registered # 158)
Effective from December 2012 to December 2013
June 2013
Evaluation manager
AusAID Communication
Section, Canberra
page 6 of 6
UNCLASSIFIED